There are two idea I've heard (mostly from electrologists) that I'm seriously doubting the veracity of.

Firstly, I've heard that tweezing hairs causes blood to rush to the area and activates inactive hair folicles thereby making hair grow back thicker.

But if this is the case, why do old ladies who plucked their eyebrows their whole lives end up losing their eyebrows. If this myth is true, shouldn't they have Groucho Marx brows?

Secondly, that tweezing makes it harder to get electrolysis in the future. This one at least slightly makes sense since the hairs might grow back crooked, but if tweezing damages the root, might that not make electrolysis easier?

Of course, electrologists have a fairly obvious reason for badmouthing other forms of hair removal. I've read conflicting things about both claims and I can't find any actual scientific basis to back up either. Are they just myths?

It would be helpful for you if you would follow along first with your own conceptions of what you think is going on. I'm assuming you are an esthetician. Not comfortable with a guess? Well, that's okay. Try this question for a moment ...

2) It's said (by a few estheticians) that waxing will eventually reduce hairs on a person's legs. When I was a young man, I had luxurious leg hair. Now that I'm an old fart, my legs are virtually hairless. I have NEVER waxed or shaved my legs. How did that happen?

It would be helpful for you if you would follow along first with your own conceptions of what you think is going on. I'm assuming you are an esthetician. Not comfortable with a guess? Well, that's okay. Try this question for a moment ...

2) It's said (by a few estheticians) that waxing will eventually reduce hairs on a person's legs. When I was a young man, I had luxurious leg hair. Now that I'm an old fart, my legs are virtually hairless. I have NEVER waxed or shaved my legs. How did that happen?

Enough with the guessing games and tangents. It's patronizing and arrogant. If you have a point to make, make it.

" ... I'm seriously doubting the veracity of [ideas from electrologists] ... Of course, electrologists have a fairly obvious reason for badmouthing other forms of hair removal." (Re: my first question): "I don't know [the answer], so just say it."

Your statements feel like accusations. It's like the Creationists that say, "How can we be descended from fish when we don't have gills?" Guess what? We DO!

I'm trying to "soften you up" a bit so you will be more receptive to the waxing/tweezing theory upon which electrology is confidently based. With some basic understanding, you might be more receptive, and not dismiss 100-years of observation and study as being a "fairy-tale" electrologists concocted "for badmouthing other forms of hair removal."

Some of us DO have groucho marx brows after years of tweezing. I can tell you personally, that I have thick terminal hairs from the bottom of my brow to the edge of my eyelid which are very noticeable after 15 years of tweezing the area. That is the result of plucking. On a bad day I look like Fru-Fru from Dune. http://i.guim.co.uk/static/w-620/h--/q-9...ne-1984-007.jpg

The committee regrets to inform you that you won't be winning the "Miss Congeniality" award. All seriousness aside, I hope you are receptive to some solid information.

So, here's one tiny factoid to consider.

Most people think the hair "root" is a separate structure that fits into a tube-like configuration called a follicle. This is not the case. That "root" you pull out is the skin itself and, upon tweezing, you tear out a good portion of the follicle (skin).

If you have the opportunity to tweeze out a chunk of a man's beard ... quickly squeeze the skin and you will see blood oozing out from the torn-out follicles (hair roots). Tweezing breaks tiny blood vessels and injures the skin ... (and creates an opportunity for infection).

A large portion of the follicle lies well into the reticular dermis. This layer of skin heals (only) by laying down collagen (a lot of visible collagen we term "a scar").

With each and every "plucking," some scar tissue forms in the injured (dermal layer) follicle. This can do several things. It can eventually cause an irregular appearance to the surface of the skin (pebbling). It can cause the regrowing hair to grow "crooked." In some specific cases, perhaps, the hair growth might be eliminated (this might be the case with some eyebrow cases).

As far as waxing being a competitive form of hair removal? The idea is preposterous.

My understanding--but please correct me if I'm wrong--is that tweezing/waxing are really only likely to make hair grow back thicker/darker in areas that are hormone-sensitive. Therefore, eyebrows are "okay," in that the blood rushing to that area isn't going to make the hair grow crazy, whereas a woman's neck, for instance, is a terrible idea.

I'm on Spiro (a drug that blocks androgens from getting to hair follicles) and while I rarely wax, I've noticed that waxing (mainly my thighs) no longer makes the hair get coarser. I think it's because the blood is still rushing to the area but there aren't as many androgens in it... Does anyone think this is likely?

Human biology is complex and even with this tiny "hair & follicle," a lot is not fully understood. Some people do well with waxing and yet other people can wax the same area and have problems.

At the moment I'm working SLOWLY with a young woman (15-years-old) that waxed her bikini area and ended up with horrible ingrowing hairs (three hair "bundles" required surgical removal). It was a mess! Another person can wax the same area and have no problems whatsoever.

The committee regrets to inform you that you won't be winning the "Miss Congeniality" award. All seriousness aside, I hope you are receptive to some solid information.

From your very first response, you have repeatedly insulted me, talked down to me and treated me as an ignorant antagonist.

How exactly does me requesting scientific evidence to backup a claim make me a creationist?

And I should point out, you still haven't provided any actual evidence, just a narrative. Maybe that narrative is 100% accurate, maybe it isn't. That's what I was trying to find out in the first place before you railroaded my thread.

Originally Posted By: Michael Bono

From hundreds/thousands of observations theory starts to emerge.

That's not even remotely how science works. Anecdotal evidence plus more anecdotal evidence never equals a legitimate scientific theory.

That would require some sort of controlled trial, which is what I wanted information on in the first place.

Too bad a "creationist" has to explain this to you.

All seriousness aside, you are an arrogant, patronizing jerk, and I expected better from this site's reputation.

My understanding--but please correct me if I'm wrong--is that tweezing/waxing are really only likely to make hair grow back thicker/darker in areas that are hormone-sensitive. Therefore, eyebrows are "okay," in that the blood rushing to that area isn't going to make the hair grow crazy, whereas a woman's neck, for instance, is a terrible idea.

I'm on Spiro (a drug that blocks androgens from getting to hair follicles) and while I rarely wax, I've noticed that waxing (mainly my thighs) no longer makes the hair get coarser. I think it's because the blood is still rushing to the area but there aren't as many androgens in it... Does anyone think this is likely?

Thank you for your response. This does make some sense. I would still like to see some controlled scientific basis for the idea, but as a fellow layperson, I doubt you have any more access to that kind of information than I do.

When you tweeze hair, the white clump around the base of the hair is the internal root sheath. Tweezing and waxing the hair follicles may distort the follicles, which makes it more difficult for the electrogist to remove hair. I think even the direction in which you remove hair can affect how it will grow back.

Tweezing the hair on my knuckles a few times, though did sting a little, I have noticed not all hairs have grown back.I've plucked the light hairs on my cheeks and have noticed that they have grown back a little longer, making me worried I did the wrong thing, plucked them because I hated that slight shadow when I turned my head in a mirror.The hairs on both knuckles and cheeks when pulled, had that bulb like ending to them, the root I'm presuming, though some hairs didn't so I guess they broke off from the root.Is it possible that continued plucking/tweezing could change that hairs growth cycle from Anogen to telogen phase? I've read telogen phase last anywhere from 2-6 months then reverts back to Anogen phase and regrows again.I'm asking because like I said the hair on my knuckles looks like less has grown back.

It offers some explanation to your question.There is a lot we still need to find out about hair growth, but observation over a number of years does form ideas which medical research can further explore.Michael Bono offered you "food for thought" in his quirky way. Please don't take it offensively. He is a great teacher to us all, making us think, doubt, test and explore.

Women have eye brows from the start they don't get chin hairs until they get older or have hormone issues. This is because they either have excess testosterone or decreased oestrogen. By having decreased Oestrogen you are therefore increasing the balance of testosterone in your body. When plucking something that is natural to a women like eye brows over plucking can leave thin eye brows. When plucking a female chin these hairs are stimilated by blood and the hormone imbalancement to grow more. Think of it like plucking weeds if you don't get the whole root like electrolysis does you suddendly find even more weeds than you have to start with.

It can take up to 3 months for the same hair to grow back in an area if hair grows back in an area prior to this it is a new hair and not the same hair that you plucked previously. Give an area 3 months before deciding on whether that hair will grow back.

When I pluck the hairs from my knuckles, they start to grow back within a few days to a week.Are you saying that it is not the same hair yet a new hair growing out of the same area?It seems like the same hair, I took pro hormones a few years ago, foolish of me, I listened to another rather than looking in to them myself, my hair seems to grow back pretty fast, whether it be plucking or shaving, all the posts I've read that people's hair takes weeks to grow back seems insane as mine grows back within a few days to a week like I said.

A tweezed hair, complete with an intact root, cannot grow back in a few days. It has to be a new hair. If you don't see a bulb when you tweeze, then you are probably breaking or slicing the hair shaft off just below the skin surface. In that case, the same hair keeps growing and you see it peak above the skin in a couple days or so.